Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mac Mouths Off - Conceal carry laws should not include privacy provisions
The Eau Claire Spectator ^ | October 6, 2005 | Susan MacLaughlin

Posted on 10/06/2005 6:41:57 PM PDT by jdege

Mac Mouths Off

Conceal carry laws should not include privacy provisions
By Susan MacLaughlin

When my step-dad died last spring, my family began a long process of clearing out his personal possessions. Some we gave to charity, and others, including family heirlooms, were dispersed among his children, siblings and nieces and nephews.

As we culled through his closet, I was shocked to learn that my family owned a gun. I deserve the right to at least know they have that power.

What floored me was when my mom nonchalantly asked me to take the gun out to my uncle's truck. I had never touched a gun before.

However, not wanting to make waves, I did it. And, despite being in its case, in poor repair and most importantly unloaded, I somehow worried that I'd shoot myself. I was scared throughout the minute-long walk outside to the driveway.

I never want to touch a gun again.

And I don't know if I'd want a gun in my house again, either.

Last Thursday, state Sen. Dave Zien, R-Eau Claire, and state Rep. Scott Gunderson, R-Waterford, introduced legislation that would allow people to carry concealed weapons. Zien also championed a similar bill two years ago that was vetoed by Democratic Governor Jim Doyle.

The current piece of legislation makes me nervous. I don't like the idea of not knowing if Joe Schmo walking down the street is packing or not.

What's worse is that in its current form, the legislation states this vital information about who is carrying a concealed weapon should be kept totally private - even from law enforcement.

This would mean that in situations like routine traffic stops, officers would not be able to check to see if the vehicle's owner had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Despite what the National Rifle Association says, it is in fact guns, not people alone, that kill other people. Those hired to keep us safe have a right to expect a certain degree of protection as well. We owe it to our officers to give them information about potentially dangerous situations, especially if we have it right at our fingertips.

If officers don't know who has a gun or not, they will likely have to treat everyone as if they are carrying a dangerous weapon. And really, would you blame them?

Further, the public has a right to know who is and is not carrying a concealed weapon.

Zien and Gunderson said in a recent Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article it wouldn't be fair to those choosing to conceal weapons, because it would make them targets in criminal investigations, even if they didn't have a reason to suspect them.

You know what? Tough. If people feel the need to conceal weapons, they should expect some consequences. And maybe being questioned now and then will be one of those consequences. If they don't commit crimes, they should have little to worry about.

When we're talking about something as serious as guns - which can take a life in an instant - a free flow of information is imperative.

I understand guns are a necessary part of life. People use them to hunt. Police officers and the men and women in the armed services use them for protection. I understand the Bill of Rights guarantees we all have the right to bear arms.

I don't understand letting anybody who jumps through small hoops walk through the streets with a gun in their back pocket.

I certainly don't understand not giving the public and the police fair warning. If someone holds the power to surprise me and take my life in a matter of seconds, I deserve the right to at least know they have that power.

If people are given the choice to conceal and carry weapons, the rest of us should be given the opportunity to have an informed choice on weather or not to associate with them.

MacLaughlin is a senior print journalism major and editorial editor of The Spectator. Mac Mouths Off is a weekly column that appears every Thursday.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: banglist; shallissue; smokinggun; wisconsin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 next last
Why do gun-owning parents let their kids grow up to be hoplophobes?
1 posted on 10/06/2005 6:42:00 PM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jdege

What a total dope!


2 posted on 10/06/2005 6:42:57 PM PDT by Tax-chick (When bad things happen, conservatives get over it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege
If people are given the choice to conceal and carry weapons, the rest of us should be given the opportunity to have an informed choice on weather or not to associate with them.

MacLaughlin is a senior print journalism major and editorial editor of The Spectator

Good to know the editor of the newspaper doesn't know the difference between weather and whether....

3 posted on 10/06/2005 6:45:52 PM PDT by mwyounce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege; Americanwolf
I don't like the idea of not knowing if Joe Schmo walking down the street is packing or not.

Stupid argument on the authors part. She doesn't know if Joe Schmo is carrying now. She assumes he isn't because there is no CCW law in Wisconsin, and that is a very stupid assumption. The only thing I will disagree with in the Wisconsin bill is not letting the police know. They have a right to protect themselves and should be able to tell if you have a CCW. The general public does not have that right.AWB

4 posted on 10/06/2005 6:46:40 PM PDT by Americanwolfsbrother (Don't hate on someone for using their mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

I hate to think what would have happened if her Mom had asked her to carry a box of rat poison, a baseball bat, a set of steak knives or a six pack of Jolt cola to the truck. I do believe Mom would have had to call the paramedics.

This woman is a waste of perfectly good oxygen


5 posted on 10/06/2005 6:46:42 PM PDT by George Stupidnopolis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jdege
" MacLaughlin is a senior print journalism major"

Wow, impressive.

How about we force every woman who gets an abortion to register with the state and have her name made public?

Oh no, can't do that. A woman has a 'right' to an abortion somewhere in the bill of rights (keep looking, you'll find it).

However, the right that is clearly outlined in the 2nd amendment doesn't protect gun owners in the same way. See, it's one of those amendments those idiotic founding fathers wrote but didn't actually mean. Unlike the 'right to privacy' that gave us Roe V Wade, which isn't actually there, but the founding fathers meant for it to be there.

Phew, that's some damn twisted logic right there.
6 posted on 10/06/2005 6:47:57 PM PDT by flashbunny (Suggested New RNC Slogan: "The Republican Party: Who else you gonna vote for?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

LOL! Hey Susan, ready for fitting that burhka yet? If not, you'd best get ready right quick 'cause you ain't nothin' but a dhimmi!


7 posted on 10/06/2005 6:49:04 PM PDT by Bogolyubski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

Miss MacLaughlin is a disgrace to her heritage.

Any grown adult who is a-freakin'-fraid to touch a gun doesn't deserve the right to vote, much less have a dumbass newpaper column.


8 posted on 10/06/2005 6:49:22 PM PDT by Emmett McCarthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

" I understand the Bill of Rights guarantees we all have the right to bear arms."


OK, even in a totally clueless person at least the correct reading of the 2nd amendment has penetrated.


9 posted on 10/06/2005 6:51:09 PM PDT by gondramB (Conservatism is a positive doctrine. Reactionaryism is a negative doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege
"If officers don't know who has a gun or not, they will likely have to treat everyone as if they are carrying a dangerous weapon. And really, would you blame them?"

They do already if they are doing their job.

10 posted on 10/06/2005 6:52:39 PM PDT by Dust in the Wind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

I can think of several words to describe the person who wrote this. However, after reading her emotional diatribe, I have serious doubt as to whether she has any cognitive abilities whatsoever, and therefore, Ms. MacLaughlin probably falls in the "speak slowly and use small words" category. I suppose she would comprehend "idiot" or "stupid" although I hesitate to insult stupid and idiotic people by calling her such.


11 posted on 10/06/2005 6:53:07 PM PDT by stylin_geek (Liberalism: comparable to a chicken with its head cut off, but with more spastic motions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: George Stupidnopolis

George Stupidnopolis wrote:
"I hate to think what would have happened if her Mom had asked her to carry a box of rat poison, a baseball bat, a set of steak knives or a six pack of Jolt cola to the truck. I do believe Mom would have had to call the paramedics. "

-- Or imagine if the mom had asked her to carry dad's old S&M paraphanalia, crack pipes, kiddie porn, etc etc..
I think it would have been time for a suicide internvention hahahaha
The lady who wrote the article is a total dum-dum.


12 posted on 10/06/2005 6:53:23 PM PDT by 1FASTGLOCK45 (FreeRepublic: More fun than watching Dem'Rats drown like Turkeys in the rain! ! !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Americanwolfsbrother
I forgot this one to...

I don't understand letting anybody who jumps through small hoops walk through the streets with a gun in their back pocket.

What about Driver's licenses? A 2,000 lb car is much deadlier then a handgun.

13 posted on 10/06/2005 6:54:32 PM PDT by Americanwolfsbrother (Don't hate on someone for using their mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jdege

Does she need Huggies or Depends? I mean, it sounds like she filled up her pants over touching a gun that was INSIDE A CASE.


14 posted on 10/06/2005 6:54:40 PM PDT by M203M4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

Yes gun owners should have no privacy. /sarcasm
Nor aborters or abortion clinic owners
Or HIV Positive Gays.
Or Muslims
Or Doctors
Or Jouralists.
They all kill or get more people killed than law abiding gun owners.
What a scarlet letter hoplophobe.


15 posted on 10/06/2005 6:55:50 PM PDT by axes_of_weezles (mainstream extremist (Ha))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

Yes gun owners should have no privacy. /sarcasm
Nor aborters or abortion clinic owners
Or HIV Positive Gays.
Or Muslims
Or Doctors
Or Jouralists.
They all kill or get more people killed than law abiding gun owners.
What a scarlet letter hoplophobe.


16 posted on 10/06/2005 6:57:36 PM PDT by axes_of_weezles (mainstream extremist (Ha))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

This woman obviously has mental issues totally unrelated to firearms. She is certifiably bonkers.


17 posted on 10/06/2005 6:59:38 PM PDT by AlaskaErik (Everyone should have a subject they are ignorant about. I choose professional corporate sports.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jdege

"If officers don't know who has a gun or not, they will likely have to treat everyone as if they are carrying a dangerous weapon. And really, would you blame them?"

Susan, Susan, Susan. Were you born stupid my dear or have you taken lessons? Any police officer that DOESN"T treat everyone as if they were carrying a dangerous weapon WOULD HAVE TO BE DUMBER THAN YOU!


18 posted on 10/06/2005 7:01:07 PM PDT by Panzerlied ("We shall never surrender!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Americanwolfsbrother
The only thing I will disagree with in the Wisconsin bill is not letting the police know. They have a right to protect themselves and should be able to tell if you have a CCW

The only thing knowing that you have a CCW tells the cop is that you may be carrying legally. How does that help them stay safe? If you have a CCW you are unlikely to be a threat and may even be an asset if the cop is endangered. He still runs the same risk that the guy with no CCW might might be armed and in no mood to go to jail for an outstanding warrant.

19 posted on 10/06/2005 7:04:40 PM PDT by magslinger (At the end of the day the only truly educated people are autodidacts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jdege

I don't know why she was so scared. She's already brain dead.


20 posted on 10/06/2005 7:04:59 PM PDT by Phsstpok (There are lies, damned lies, statistics and presentation graphics, in descending order of truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-98 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson